[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Tru64/OSF: BIN_SH revisited

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: Tru64/OSF: BIN_SH revisited
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 18:10:10 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.11

Hi Paul, Stepan,

* Paul Eggert wrote on Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 08:55:14AM CET:
> Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> writes:
> > 0a) Revert the change to set BIN_SH in Autoconf, in order to be
> > consistent.
> >
> > 0b) Additionally, prepend /usr/bin/posix/ to the path walk of
> > _AS_DETECT_BETTER_SHELL, to choose the right shell right away, inside
> > Autoconf.
> This sounds good to me.
> > The first patch below does (0b), the second (3).  I'm tending toward
> > (0b), unsure whether to add (0a) for good measure.  What do you think?
> (0b) is good.  I see your point about (0a) but let's go ahead and
> try it, for Autoconf.  Thanks.

OK.  I've applied (0b) only for now, and dropped the Libtool patch.
Thanks for the review!

* Stepan Kasal wrote on Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 04:27:09PM CET:
> Second, if this change
> > 0b) Additionally, prepend /usr/bin/posix/ to the path walk of
> make things work on OSF, then the BIN_SH assignment becomes redundant
> cruft, right?

That depends on whether anything below (spawned by) configure ever calls
`sh' unadorned.

> We shall remove it now, before is is conserved by a release.

Without deciding over this change: iff you apply it, please also adjust
autoconf.texi which currently states that BIN_SH is set.

> Moreover, I think that the line
>       DUALCASE=1; export DUALCASE
> doesn't belong to AS_BOURNE_COMPATIBLE either, the reason is the same
> as above; I think it shall go to AS_SHELL_SANITIZE.

FWIW, I'm don't know about this one either.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]